Shredding the U.S. Constitution
When Speaker Pelosi tore up President Trump’s State of the Union Address, she might as well have been ripping up the Constitution because that’s what she and her congressional cohorts have been up to for the past three years.
In an article titled “The Ugly History of Special Prosecutors,” Steve Byas made the case that people like Archibald Cox, Ken Starr and Robert Mueller, have all been granted powers that the Constitution denies them. The President, whether he’s Nixon, Clinton or Trump, is the indisputable head of the Executive branch of the federal government, but he’s powerless when it comes to these bureaucrats. One of the inevitable problems is that these various unelected prosecutors, although they are supposed to investigate specific crimes, can be counted upon to exceed their mandate. So it was that Starr who was installed to look into the Whitewater land scandal ended up sticking his nose into the Monica Lewinsky monkey business.
Robert Mueller was supposed to investigate collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, but he quickly discovered there was nothing to it and then spent the next year and a half trying to find something, anything, to hang on the President. And $30 million later, he could barely land a minnow, let alone Moby Dick.
As Antonin Scalia said on the occasion of his lone dissenting opinion when the court was deciding by an 8-1 decision that there was nothing unconstitutional about an Independent Counsel being granted powers that exceeded those of the President: “I fear the Court has permanently encumbered the Republic with an institution that will do it great harm.”
He later expounded on his decision, writing “To take away the power to prosecute from the president and give it to somebody who’s not under his control is a terrible erosion of presidential power.”
Or as Lavrentiy Beria, the brutal head of Stalin’s secret police once put it: “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.”
Even Harvard law professor (emeritus) Alan Dershowitz, a left-wing zealot, has argued that “The president is entitled to fire the head of the FBI. The president is entitled to direct his attorney general who to investigate, who not to. I don’t see that the prosecutor (Robert Mueller) should have a right to turn a constitutionally protected act of the president into a crime by speculating on what his motive might have been.”
As for asking that a foreign nation investigate Joe Biden and son Hunter, that was well within President Trump’s constitutional right, even if the father happens to be one of his political rivals. The President is granted certain protections because lawsuits and the like would hamper his ability to carry out his duties. Hoping to become the next president doesn’t warrant the same protection.
In the same way, there was no way to prevent the President from leveling tariffs on Mexico if they refused to ignore his requests that they either turn back caravans of aliens from Central America or at least offer them sanctuary in Mexico.
Scalia concluded his remarks, saying: “Frequently, an issue of this sort will come before the Court clad, so to speak, in sheep’s clothing: the potential of the asserted principle to effect important change in the equilibrium of power is not immediately evident, and must be discerned by a careful and perceptive analysis. But this wolf comes as a wolf.”
In moving to impeach the President on solely partisan grounds, the shoddy likes of Nancy Pelosi, Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff, thought it was sufficient to point at Trump and cry “Wolf!” But they were, in fact, the ravenous wolves the public needed to fear.
I’m reminded that if anyone ever asks you the difference between Nancy Pelosi’s House and the Okefenokee, tell them that one of them is a rancid swamp filled with man-eating alligators, the other is a national wildlife refuge in Folkston, Georgia.
People are always finding a reason to say life isn’t fair. Sometimes they offer as proof the non-stop persecution of President Trump. Other times it might be the premature death of a friend or loved one. Other times, it might be the fact that Michael Bloomberg has $50 billion at his disposal to buy the presidency.
But I’m here to tell you what’s really unfair. Whenever you pull a muscle or strain your lower back and your body is crying out for the comfort and warmth of a heating pad, you are told to apply ice for 20 minutes or so three times a day.
Doctors insist that brings blood to the scene of the ache and helps the healing process. But my far more logical theory is that the application of ice is so painful that you’ll stop thinking about the reason for the ice.
After I paid someone a compliment recently, she accused me of lying. But, I denied it. Flattery is not the same thing at all. I contend that flattery, unless it’s employed for self-serving reasons, such as getting laid or getting promoted, should never be confused with lying. It’s just the truth dressed up in its Sunday best.
When November rolls around, every Conservative should make a point of reminding any fence-sitters they might know how important it is to re-elect Donald Trump even if they think he lacks the proper decorum to be our Commander-in-Chief.
What people sometimes forget is just because a president leaves the White House, his legacies live on long after he’s turned off the lights and left the key under the welcome mat. I’m not referring to such transient things as the Affordable Care Act, the Paris Accords and the Iran nuclear deal. We’ve all seen how easily Trump got rid of those things.
The real lasting legacy are his Supreme Court appointments.
Bill Clinton has been gone for 20 years, but Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 86, and on the Court since 1993, is still hanging in there; as is Clinton’s other appointment, Stephen Breyer, 81, and on the Court since ‘94.
Barack Obama has been gone for three years, but Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are only 59 and 65, respectively, and could be making goofy decisions for another 20 or 25 years.
As much as I despise Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, I have to acknowledge that even RINOs serve a purpose. That’s because control of the House and Senate is a numbers game. So long as there is one more Republican than Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer is just another senator. It’s the same in the House. Even if it takes a passel of RINO’s to retake the House in November and turn Pelosi back into a pumpkin, having a Congress that isn’t constantly trying to restrain Trump from carrying out his America First agenda would constitute the dawn of a great new day.
Joseph Neuner passed along a list of things to do in public that would drive people nuts. My favorites included the following: “Walk into Sea World with a fishing rod.” “When the money comes out of an ATM, scream 'I won! I won!’” “Look at someone directly through a window, pretend it’s a mirror, and say "Oh, god, I’m such a mess.” “Tell a child that you’re a time traveler and that you’re her or him all grown up.”
Culled from my copy of “Screw Calm and Get Angry”:
“The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it’s unfamiliar territory.” (Paul Fox)
“That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.” (Aldous Huxley)
“Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” (Plato)
It’s always prudent to consider the source of your information. For instance, Emo Phillips points out “I used to think that the brain was the most wonderful organ in my body. Then I realized who was telling me this.”
Still, one of the most amazing things about a human brain, even the brain of a liberal I assume, is how intricate it is. I recall once reading about a man who suffered a head injury. He recovered, except for one thing: he could no longer recall the names of fruits and vegetables.
Can you imagine being perfectly lucid when it comes to astrophysics but when you go to a restaurant, you have to tell the waiter you don’t want any of those round greeny things in your salad but that you wouldn’t mind some extra yellow thingamabobs?